9 ms·

I don't trust a single thing he says at this point without evidence, I just can't possibly see it as breakeven without it, which we likely won't receive as they

I don't trust a single thing he says at this point without evidence, I just can't possibly see it as breakeven without it, which we likely won't receive as they are a private corp.

next_xibalba 3y ago
Why does it matter to you? I am fascinated by people who have such strong opinions about Musk, particularly on the negative side. The vast majority have never met him and, if they were honest, have probably been positively impacted by him (or not at all). Personally, I hope it’s true. Starlink is good for the world.
- JauntyHatAngle 3y ago
  I don't really see why it would be surprising. He is an influential figure that is greatly impacting tech, culture and politics. For better or worse is up to the individual opinion, but its not really weird to have a strong view on a polarising figure, especially one with the influence of musk.
- Waterluvian 3y ago
  I think Starlink has colossal potential to do tremendous good in the world. That's exactly why I care so much about how much control and impact a character like Musk has. Would suck if my ISP suddenly just started sending me dank memes and poop emojis one day because the CEO got broken up with.
  - beepbooptheory 3y ago
    The fact that, at this point, this is not a totally ridiculous thing to be concerned about is very surreal but also pretty funny honestly.
    - Waterluvian 3y ago
      It’s absolutely hilarious when it’s something like Twitter. When it’s an ISP or a rocket or an autonomous car, I laugh a wee bit less. XD
- mckirk 3y ago
  People value trustworthiness, and Musk's track record with public statements about his businesses definitely isn't the best in that regard -- though that largely concerns the utopian predictions/promises he likes to make, I suppose. Maybe statements of his about the current state of affairs are more reliable.
  - johnnyworker 3y ago
    Here's him not knowing what he is talking about, very confidently and to the detriment of those who actually do know, about something really basic. https://www.theregister.com/2022/11/14/musk_twitter_rpc_spat/ https://www.theregister.com/2022/11/14/musk_twitter_rpc_spat...
- not_wyoming 3y ago
  It's possible to admire the impact of Musk's products while also scrutinizing the things he says on Twitter
- capableweb 3y ago
  > The vast majority have never met him and, if they were honest, have probably been positively impacted by him (or not at all). Why would people most probably been positively impacted by him? He seems to constantly have knee-jerk reactions to things happening around him, and his companies seems to frequently have issues with overworking employees.
  - Tepix 3y ago
    2 examples: He's accelerated the switch to electric cars. He's made transport to space a lot cheaper, saving a lot of taxpayer's money.
    - rootusrootus 3y ago
      He didn't create Tesla, though I'll grant him some credit for creating a combination of product and hype that made for a popular EV. Gwynne gets all the credit for SpaceX IMO. Elon gets credit for letting her succeed.
      - inemesitaffia 3y ago
        Tesla was an idea. The Tesla you see today is his doing. Eberhard would have ended up like Wework without the Newmann payout. Remember the Tesla deathwatch blog?
      - suoduandao3 3y ago
        Do you think she could have done it without him? Everyone loves the Teslas and hates the Edisons, but the world does need Edisons.
      - adventured 3y ago
        > Gwynne gets all the credit for SpaceX IMO It was nice of her to have the idea, pursue that idea through financial hell across many years, bankroll the start of the business top to bottom, use all of her connections to get it outside funded, and sustain it financially personally to the direct threat of personal bankruptcy. Good thing she did all that and gets all the credit.
- solumunus 3y ago
  What a ridiculous standard for deciding whether you respect someone or not. Public figures can give you plenty of valid reasons for disliking them without having met them. I could list endless public figures from past and present which you almost certainly don’t like because of their words and actions.
- webkike 3y ago
  I haven’t met him, but he has bought out my favorite social media website solely so he can insert his insipid opinions and comments, so I think the negative reactions are warranted. Why do people always talk about needing to meet a guy to have an opinion on them? I haven’t met Dick Cheney either
  - s1gnp0st 3y ago
    [flagged]
    - chazhaz 3y ago
      I suspect that the parent poster is morally opposed to them as well, even if they don’t regularly make baseless claims on platforms they bought to make baseless claims on
      - s1gnp0st 3y ago
        [flagged]
  - next_xibalba 3y ago
    > he has bought out my favorite social media websites solely so he can insert his insipid opinions and comments Can you share a link that documents him saying this? Every statement I've heard is something to the effect of "to preserve a space for free speech." If you can't produce evidence, you're assuming intent. That's your bias, and it isn't rooted in reality. > Why do people always talk about needing to meet a guy to have an opinion on them? I think its more a question of the degree to which people care. Dick Cheney was integral in launching wars that spent trillions and killed millions. Compare that to Musk who is probably more responsible than any other single person for reviving both the electrification of transport and the reviving of space exploration. All via companies that you're perfectly able to completely ignore. Meanwhile, Cheney used public treasure to mire the U.S. in foreverwars. Do these two people seem even remotely equivalent to you? Do both seem worthy of your very strong opinions?
    - 3y ago
- zachrip 3y ago
  You do not need to meet someone to form an opinion of them.
- NelsonMinar 3y ago
  Well here we are talking about his latest statement. I think it bears examination whether what he says is trustworthy.
- rootusrootus 3y ago
  Equally, I'm fascinated by people who white knight for him. I assume to some extent it must just be ideology. Objectively, he has a history of making bold claims about his products that either never come to fruition, or are delayed for years. Being skeptical of what he says is the rational choice. > have probably been positively impacted by him Well, every time my Model 3's wipers go batshit insane, I get a little irritated with his decision to forego a known good solution that the rest of the world has been using for decades. Not feeling positively impacted at that moment ;-)
  - JumpCrisscross 3y ago
    > he has a history of making bold claims about his products that either never come to fruition To my knowledge, he has never lied about the present financial state of his companies. That gives him credibility in a way e.g. Yaccarino bullshitting about what fraction of Twitter’s advertisers have returned does not.
    - Atreiden 3y ago
      https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/elon-musk-funding-secured-tweets-ruled-false-new-court-filing-suggests-rcna24714 https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/elon-musk-funding-secur...
      - theultdev 3y ago
        Then a jury ruled in Musk's favor, right? https://www.cnn.com/2023/02/03/cars/musk-tesla-tweet-lawsuit-jury/index.html https://www.cnn.com/2023/02/03/cars/musk-tesla-tweet-lawsuit... The end result is left out every time the "court finds" articles are linked. The jury found the opposite, which is what actually matters.
        rootusrootus 3y ago
        Well, a jury also ruled that his pedo comments were totally okay, so I don't know if I'd use that as a metric for what constitutes truth.
- shafyy 3y ago
  After the shit he has said and pulled in the past few years, you are "fascinated" that many people don't like Musk? Really?
- strangesmells02 3y ago
  [flagged]
- matthewdgreen 3y ago
  I don’t think you have to hate Musk or Starlink to be skeptical about any claim he makes about the cash flow of his non-public businesses. He’s spent the past year saying ridiculous things and making promises about Twitter that didn’t check out. Credibility is a non-renewable resource. With that said, you don’t have to have strong feelings about this particular issue. But if you’re commenting on this article it’s a very reasonable sentiment.
- nimbius 3y ago
  [flagged]
  - theultdev 3y ago
    Digital colonialism... you can't be serious? You really think giving villages or tribes with limited or no internet service is a bad thing? There were quite a few tribes given Starlink to fix their school computers so their children could get a proper education. You shoved in a lot of other nonsense in there too, but I'd thought I'd call out the most ridiculous first. > Starlink was intentionally curtailed during the Ukraine war in order to provide tactical advantage to Russian forces Starlink was given to Ukraine for humanitarian reasons. Ukraine wanted to use it for drone strikes and wanted the area expanded. Musk did not want Starlink used offensively. You seem to support the US government being able to tell private citizens what they have to do or who they have to kill with the technology they create? Ukraine is not even a NATO ally and we are not in war with Russia.
    - nimbius 3y ago
      i mean, its sort of offtopic since many American readers here might not know about it, but the free internet scheme in India was sort of a dismal failure their effort was called: "internet.org" https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internet.org#Net_neutrality_criticism_in_India https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internet.org#Net_neutrality_cr... it basically just dumped unmoderated facebook on most of India. https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2021/10/25/facebook-india-hate-speech-misinformation-muslims-social-media https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2021/10/25/facebook-india-hat...
    - itslennysfault 3y ago
      I certainly wouldn't argue that providing internet to anyone is a bad thing, and I'd love to see as much of the world as possible have access. However, I do think it's a little comical that in doing so he is enabling the spread of the "woke mind virus" to new regions and people. So, it's conceivable that he will eventually think it was a bad thing.
      - 3y ago
- llbeansandrice 3y ago
  Isn't he in trouble with the SEC for things he's said on twitter about his companies? I think it's entirely reasonable to be skeptical of the things he says, particularly ones that make himself look good, with no evidence, and is unverifiable since Starlink isn't public.
- andrewmutz 3y ago
  Many people have strong opinions about Musk because he is intentionally inflammatory. He works hard for those negative opinions. To choose just one example of him clearly trying to generate engagement/outrage: https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1601894132573605888 https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1601894132573605888
  - s1gnp0st 3y ago
    [flagged]
    - s1gnp0st 3y ago
      While you folks are obediently trying to suppress this fact, take note of my actual position on COVID-19, vaccination, etc. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38018664 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38018664 I liked the old left much better than the new left. You're neoconservatives in blue.
- geepytee 3y ago
  Musk has and is changing the world, change always makes people nervous.
- TaylorAlexander 3y ago
  Having met Musk is irrelevant when deciding whether to trust the public statements of someone who has a long and well documented history of lying in public statements. In particular he has repeatedly lied about business related details, most notably claims of self driving readiness. It doesn’t require strong opinions about Musk to understand the value in taking what he says with skepticism.
- wg0 3y ago
  OP has only expressed lack of confidence in the statements Elon makes. Objectively speaking, there are plenty of examples where it has been the case that let's say, there were "alternate facts" involved. And no, it is not about predictions of this being done by that year alone.
- fredgrott 3y ago
  honestly it is from Elon's own history.... 1. His only software contribution at PayPal was torn out and discarded 2. After his software at paypal was rejected he was fired by the board at paypal. It is not that he does not have business skills to market. It is that he presents himself as someone that does quality engineering..which in fact is somewhat false.
- jacquesm 3y ago
  Musk has gone to substantial lengths to undermine his own credibility and you wonder why people question his statements? It's not even a 'strong opinion' at this point, it's just reality: Musk can be trusted for what he says. It may be true, it may not be true. It may be technically true. But you'll never know until you've seen the evidence with your own eyes.
- failbuffer 3y ago
  Truth in tech matters to this audience, at least to the engineers. Musk had repeatedly overpromised and undelivered ("full self-driving"), made preposterous claims (2019: Tesla Semi convoy FSD is "something we can do today"), and engaged in fraudulent behavior (SolarCity or the "funding secured" tweet). You can love him because rockets, EVs, and enormous satellite constellations are pretty cool, but you'd be a fool to trust him.
- lemper 3y ago
  not him. but I just can't trust any words of him since many years ago without any hard proof. as for his impacts, I spent the last 20 minutes thinking what has he done that positively impact me and found nothing.
- 2OEH8eoCRo0 3y ago
  > Starlink is good for the world. It wasn't good for Ukraine when Musk pulled the plug on them.
  - adventured 3y ago
    Which is overshadowed drastically - 1,000 to 1 at least - by the good Starlink has done for Ukraine. That's about the weakest straw argument I've seen against Starlink. Musk's SpaceX is the only reason Ukraine has been able to maintain its Internet infrastructure throughout the war. It would have been a communications disaster otherwise, particularly for all non-military (NATO would have done its best to provide patch-work communications for the military).
    - 2OEH8eoCRo0 3y ago
      Maybe, but he also interfered in a rather large Ukrainian operation to Russia's benefit. https://www.nytimes.com/2023/09/08/world/europe/elon-musk-ukraine-starlink-drones.html https://www.nytimes.com/2023/09/08/world/europe/elon-musk-uk... > Elon Musk foiled an attack on Russia’s Black Sea fleet last year > Mykhailo Podolyak, a top adviser to President Volodymyr Zelensky, accused Mr. Musk of enabling Russian aggression. Because of Mr. Musk’s decision, “civilians, children are being killed,” he wrote on X on Thursday. “This is the price of a cocktail of ignorance and big ego.” > a SpaceX executive said that Starlink had taken steps to curtail Ukraine’s use of the technology to control drones, infuriating Ukrainian officials.
- adventured 3y ago
  [flagged]
  - johnnyworker 3y ago
    > the extreme response from the political left to wit: > I don't trust a single thing he says at this point without evidence That's a very unemotional, and very rational thing to say about anyone, really. Why should you "trust" a random stranger like that? If you call that "extreme" and launch into a tirade of Musk being on "their" list that's really just something to do with you, and not an argument to blindly trust Musk, or anyone else for that matter.
- alienicecream 3y ago
  It doesn't bother you to see someone take advantage of people's naivety with false promises?
- chung8123 3y ago
  I don't think starlink's private ownership is good for the world. I don't know enough about space but I hope there is room up there for a publicly owned satellite internet system.
- benzible 3y ago
  Do you actually limit your opinions to people you've met, based on your personal interactions with them? Do you consider your personal impressions of someone to be a better way of evaluating their truthfulness than the public record of their past statements? Musk's record is quite clear at this point: https://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:https://elonmusk.today https://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:https:...
- footlose_3815 3y ago
  Conversely, I am fascinated by people who have such strong opinions about Musk in the other direction. Those who jump to defend him. Those who put all his lies, deception, xenophobia, and record of publicly humiliating himself. I'll never take anything he says at face value because anything that's ever come out of his mouth is posturing. I'm frankly tired of billionaire windbags like him. I have no idea how someone could be a fan of his.
- slibhb 3y ago
  People are just making a friend-enemy distinction. If they judge Elon positively (friend), they minimize his flaws; if they judge him negatively (enemy), they minimize his contributions.
jvanderbot 3y ago
I suspect government contacts. And not US government contracts necessarily.
rburhum 3y ago
[flagged]
- organsnyder 3y ago
  Starlink has also been used by Musk to dictate decisions in the Ukraine war. That's far more serious than "just" a "culture war" issue.
  - inemesitaffia 3y ago
    [dead]
  - coding123 3y ago
    If Starlink had not existed, there would have been no decision to make. Just because it is an option doesn't mean the country needs to use it, depend on it at all. If your success or failure in a war depends on one company doing something or not, you're definitely doing WAR wrong.
    - organsnyder 3y ago
      Yes, perhaps it was naïve for Ukraine to assume that Musk's offer of Starlink access would come with no strings attached. Though I can certainly understand if Ukraine assumed that even if Musk tried to do something, the US government wouldn't let that happen, so perhaps the blame is on the United States. That being said, Musk did interfere. Whether he should have been trusted not to isn't really the point—the fact that he is inclined to use his wealth to dictate international policy in this way is extremely troubling.
      - inemesitaffia 3y ago
        The interference was the supply of equipment. Something that if meant for military use should have come via the State Department or Pentagon.
- deleted 3y ago
  [deleted]
belter 3y ago
Cash flow break-even is measured over a specific accounting period, which could be monthly, quarterly, or ...over the last hour... Without specifying the time frame, the statement is not relevant.
toomuchtodo 3y ago
I own some SpaceX, am happy to take the chance without access to audited financials. Could go to zero, or maybe my kids will go to the moon.
- suoduandao3 3y ago
  How'd you get in on that? Sounds like it could be an interesting story.
  - toomuchtodo 3y ago
    Private equity marketplace as an accredited investor. I am a degenerate gambler at heart.
    - suoduandao3 3y ago
      Cool. If I die childless I'm considering willing my assets to a company like SpaceX or Blue Origin - any suggestions on which or should I just split it among the leaders at the time?
      - toomuchtodo 3y ago
        No suggestions on who unfortunately. A potential methodology is establishing a living trust, funding it with all of your wealth, a pour-over will to clean up anything you missed, and assign the beneficiaries accordingly based on your post life wishes (you should be able to trivially get SpaceX, Blue Origin, etcs EIN/taxpayer ID, although you would want to speak with someone at those orgs so they know your plan and someone can admin whatever is sent their way). Same as you would with charitable bequests as part of your estate, directed towards charities and non profits. Not an attorney, not your attorney, speak with one for estate planning purposes. Hope this helps!
minimaxir 3y ago
Or it's Twitter/X's "not including the cost of servicing debt, the company already is cash flow positive." https://slate.com/technology/2023/10/x-linda-yaccarino-debt-cash-flow-positive.html https://slate.com/technology/2023/10/x-linda-yaccarino-debt-...
good8675309 3y ago
So you trust public corps? Like Microsoft, Google, Facebook, etc. Are you this outraged anytime Sundar is mentioned or Satya or Zuckerberg, or any number of these other mega corp CEOs are mentioned? Because they are deeply corrupt and actively work against the people in the name of profits and power. I don't understand how Musk has become some boogey man to the chronically online types, sure he is self interested and focused on profits and power but no more so than all of these other tech CEOs.
rayiner 3y ago
I’m not a huge Musk fan, but his shortcoming seems to be more having unreasonable projections about the future. I’m not aware of him lying about things in the present.
- good8675309 3y ago
  > "unreasonable projections about the future" I've heard a few of them, like concerns about AI which I don't think are unreasonable but I'm curious about what other projections he's had that are unreasonable?
  - suoduandao3 3y ago
    The Cybertruck's supposed to be out by now. Also self-driving.
    - good8675309 3y ago
      Ah, okay, yeah in those cases it seems he is overly optimistic, disingenuous, or just really bad at estimating projects. In the case of the Cybertruck there were major engineering issues that came up along with manufacturing issues, apparently it turned into a nightmare, I'm surprised that it actually looks like it may ship in the next few years.
  - callalex 3y ago
    https://motherfrunker.ca/fsd/ https://motherfrunker.ca/fsd/
- teg4n_ 3y ago
  “funding secured” was him lying about the present
  - rayiner 3y ago
    https://www.cnn.com/2023/02/03/cars/musk-tesla-tweet-lawsuit-jury/index.html https://www.cnn.com/2023/02/03/cars/musk-tesla-tweet-lawsuit...
deleted 3y ago
[deleted]
RC_ITR 3y ago
The "trick" here is that he is likely speaking of operational cashflows (i.e. the 'correct' metric for low CAPEX companies). The rub, of course, is that most of the cost for something like Starlink is designing, building, and launching the satellites, which shows up in investing cashflows. Put differently, if the company was actually generating more cash than it consumes on all levels, start the IPO right now and SpaceX will be a $1tn+ company (instead of a $100bn+ company that people expect will one day generate cash and then be a $1tn+ company).
- dunmalg 3y ago
  SpaceX will never have an IPO because being publicly traded means ceding a certain degree of control. The founders' goal is to make life multiplanetary, and the typical goal of rando shareholders is to pump up the stock price. They don't want to have to deal with the latter. They may at some point spin off Starlink and IPO that, but not until it's fully deployed and not heavily dependent on frequent, super cheap, low bureaucratic friction launch services from SpaceX.
  - RC_ITR 3y ago
    https://www.reuters.com/business/aerospace-defense/spacex-fundraising-talks-150-bln-valuation-bloomberg-news-2022-11-15/ https://www.reuters.com/business/aerospace-defense/spacex-fu... They already have shareholders? And as you point out, if the founder really wanted to, he could have self-funded most of SpaceX (instead of buying X for example). He's a public company CEO already - he has no qualms about taking SpaceX public.
bryanlarsen 3y ago
You don't receive it, but there a several large institutional investors who do, and who could sue for billions if he's lying. It's not something non-actionable like saying "FSD this year". More significantly, both NASA and the Space Force receive SpaceX financial statements because they require reassurance that all their vendors are viable ongoing concerns. IOW, if this is a lie, then he could lose his 2 biggest customers. And I wouldn't be surprised if lying to the Space Force is an actual crime.
- JonChesterfield 3y ago
  Huh. So Space Force, which I was really sure is a joke, appears to be an actual thing complete with employees and things with wings. At least Wikipedia thinks so. Strange world to live in.
  - dragonwriter 3y ago
    Space Force was created by breaking out existing capacities from the Air Force into a new subordinate organization within the Department of the Air Force (similar to the way the US Army Air Forces were split off into a new service to create the Air Force, but with a relation to the parent like the Marines have to the Navy.) It was a reorg with elaborate branding impacts, not a from-scratch creation.
MagicMoonlight 3y ago
If it’s privately owned then he has less reason to lie

I don't trust a single thing he says at this point without evidence, I just can't possibly see it as breakeven without it, which we likely won't receive as they are a private corp.

next_xibalba 3y ago

Why does it matter to you? I am fascinated by people who have such strong opinions about Musk, particularly on the negative side. The vast majority have never met him and, if they were honest, have probably been positively impacted by him (or not at all). Personally, I hope it’s true. Starlink is good for the world.

JauntyHatAngle 3y ago
I don't really see why it would be surprising. He is an influential figure that is greatly impacting tech, culture and politics. For better or worse is up to the individual opinion, but its not really weird to have a strong view on a polarising figure, especially one with the influence of musk.
Waterluvian 3y ago
I think Starlink has colossal potential to do tremendous good in the world. That's exactly why I care so much about how much control and impact a character like Musk has. Would suck if my ISP suddenly just started sending me dank memes and poop emojis one day because the CEO got broken up with.
- beepbooptheory 3y ago
  The fact that, at this point, this is not a totally ridiculous thing to be concerned about is very surreal but also pretty funny honestly.
  - Waterluvian 3y ago
    It’s absolutely hilarious when it’s something like Twitter. When it’s an ISP or a rocket or an autonomous car, I laugh a wee bit less. XD
mckirk 3y ago
People value trustworthiness, and Musk's track record with public statements about his businesses definitely isn't the best in that regard -- though that largely concerns the utopian predictions/promises he likes to make, I suppose. Maybe statements of his about the current state of affairs are more reliable.
- johnnyworker 3y ago
  Here's him not knowing what he is talking about, very confidently and to the detriment of those who actually do know, about something really basic. https://www.theregister.com/2022/11/14/musk_twitter_rpc_spat/ https://www.theregister.com/2022/11/14/musk_twitter_rpc_spat...
not_wyoming 3y ago
It's possible to admire the impact of Musk's products while also scrutinizing the things he says on Twitter
capableweb 3y ago
> The vast majority have never met him and, if they were honest, have probably been positively impacted by him (or not at all). Why would people most probably been positively impacted by him? He seems to constantly have knee-jerk reactions to things happening around him, and his companies seems to frequently have issues with overworking employees.
- Tepix 3y ago
  2 examples: He's accelerated the switch to electric cars. He's made transport to space a lot cheaper, saving a lot of taxpayer's money.
  - rootusrootus 3y ago
    He didn't create Tesla, though I'll grant him some credit for creating a combination of product and hype that made for a popular EV. Gwynne gets all the credit for SpaceX IMO. Elon gets credit for letting her succeed.
    - inemesitaffia 3y ago
      Tesla was an idea. The Tesla you see today is his doing. Eberhard would have ended up like Wework without the Newmann payout. Remember the Tesla deathwatch blog?
    - suoduandao3 3y ago
      Do you think she could have done it without him? Everyone loves the Teslas and hates the Edisons, but the world does need Edisons.
    - adventured 3y ago
      > Gwynne gets all the credit for SpaceX IMO It was nice of her to have the idea, pursue that idea through financial hell across many years, bankroll the start of the business top to bottom, use all of her connections to get it outside funded, and sustain it financially personally to the direct threat of personal bankruptcy. Good thing she did all that and gets all the credit.
solumunus 3y ago
What a ridiculous standard for deciding whether you respect someone or not. Public figures can give you plenty of valid reasons for disliking them without having met them. I could list endless public figures from past and present which you almost certainly don’t like because of their words and actions.
webkike 3y ago
I haven’t met him, but he has bought out my favorite social media website solely so he can insert his insipid opinions and comments, so I think the negative reactions are warranted. Why do people always talk about needing to meet a guy to have an opinion on them? I haven’t met Dick Cheney either
- s1gnp0st 3y ago
  [flagged]
  - chazhaz 3y ago
    I suspect that the parent poster is morally opposed to them as well, even if they don’t regularly make baseless claims on platforms they bought to make baseless claims on
    - s1gnp0st 3y ago
      [flagged]
- next_xibalba 3y ago
  > he has bought out my favorite social media websites solely so he can insert his insipid opinions and comments Can you share a link that documents him saying this? Every statement I've heard is something to the effect of "to preserve a space for free speech." If you can't produce evidence, you're assuming intent. That's your bias, and it isn't rooted in reality. > Why do people always talk about needing to meet a guy to have an opinion on them? I think its more a question of the degree to which people care. Dick Cheney was integral in launching wars that spent trillions and killed millions. Compare that to Musk who is probably more responsible than any other single person for reviving both the electrification of transport and the reviving of space exploration. All via companies that you're perfectly able to completely ignore. Meanwhile, Cheney used public treasure to mire the U.S. in foreverwars. Do these two people seem even remotely equivalent to you? Do both seem worthy of your very strong opinions?
  - 3y ago
zachrip 3y ago
You do not need to meet someone to form an opinion of them.
NelsonMinar 3y ago
Well here we are talking about his latest statement. I think it bears examination whether what he says is trustworthy.
rootusrootus 3y ago
Equally, I'm fascinated by people who white knight for him. I assume to some extent it must just be ideology. Objectively, he has a history of making bold claims about his products that either never come to fruition, or are delayed for years. Being skeptical of what he says is the rational choice. > have probably been positively impacted by him Well, every time my Model 3's wipers go batshit insane, I get a little irritated with his decision to forego a known good solution that the rest of the world has been using for decades. Not feeling positively impacted at that moment ;-)
- JumpCrisscross 3y ago
  > he has a history of making bold claims about his products that either never come to fruition To my knowledge, he has never lied about the present financial state of his companies. That gives him credibility in a way e.g. Yaccarino bullshitting about what fraction of Twitter’s advertisers have returned does not.
  - Atreiden 3y ago
    https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/elon-musk-funding-secured-tweets-ruled-false-new-court-filing-suggests-rcna24714 https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/elon-musk-funding-secur...
    - theultdev 3y ago
      Then a jury ruled in Musk's favor, right? https://www.cnn.com/2023/02/03/cars/musk-tesla-tweet-lawsuit-jury/index.html https://www.cnn.com/2023/02/03/cars/musk-tesla-tweet-lawsuit... The end result is left out every time the "court finds" articles are linked. The jury found the opposite, which is what actually matters.
      - rootusrootus 3y ago
        Well, a jury also ruled that his pedo comments were totally okay, so I don't know if I'd use that as a metric for what constitutes truth.
shafyy 3y ago
After the shit he has said and pulled in the past few years, you are "fascinated" that many people don't like Musk? Really?
strangesmells02 3y ago
[flagged]
matthewdgreen 3y ago
I don’t think you have to hate Musk or Starlink to be skeptical about any claim he makes about the cash flow of his non-public businesses. He’s spent the past year saying ridiculous things and making promises about Twitter that didn’t check out. Credibility is a non-renewable resource. With that said, you don’t have to have strong feelings about this particular issue. But if you’re commenting on this article it’s a very reasonable sentiment.
nimbius 3y ago
[flagged]
- theultdev 3y ago
  Digital colonialism... you can't be serious? You really think giving villages or tribes with limited or no internet service is a bad thing? There were quite a few tribes given Starlink to fix their school computers so their children could get a proper education. You shoved in a lot of other nonsense in there too, but I'd thought I'd call out the most ridiculous first. > Starlink was intentionally curtailed during the Ukraine war in order to provide tactical advantage to Russian forces Starlink was given to Ukraine for humanitarian reasons. Ukraine wanted to use it for drone strikes and wanted the area expanded. Musk did not want Starlink used offensively. You seem to support the US government being able to tell private citizens what they have to do or who they have to kill with the technology they create? Ukraine is not even a NATO ally and we are not in war with Russia.
  - nimbius 3y ago
    i mean, its sort of offtopic since many American readers here might not know about it, but the free internet scheme in India was sort of a dismal failure their effort was called: "internet.org" https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internet.org#Net_neutrality_criticism_in_India https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internet.org#Net_neutrality_cr... it basically just dumped unmoderated facebook on most of India. https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2021/10/25/facebook-india-hate-speech-misinformation-muslims-social-media https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2021/10/25/facebook-india-hat...
  - itslennysfault 3y ago
    I certainly wouldn't argue that providing internet to anyone is a bad thing, and I'd love to see as much of the world as possible have access. However, I do think it's a little comical that in doing so he is enabling the spread of the "woke mind virus" to new regions and people. So, it's conceivable that he will eventually think it was a bad thing.
    - 3y ago
llbeansandrice 3y ago
Isn't he in trouble with the SEC for things he's said on twitter about his companies? I think it's entirely reasonable to be skeptical of the things he says, particularly ones that make himself look good, with no evidence, and is unverifiable since Starlink isn't public.
andrewmutz 3y ago
Many people have strong opinions about Musk because he is intentionally inflammatory. He works hard for those negative opinions. To choose just one example of him clearly trying to generate engagement/outrage: https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1601894132573605888 https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1601894132573605888
- s1gnp0st 3y ago
  [flagged]
  - s1gnp0st 3y ago
    While you folks are obediently trying to suppress this fact, take note of my actual position on COVID-19, vaccination, etc. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38018664 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38018664 I liked the old left much better than the new left. You're neoconservatives in blue.
geepytee 3y ago
Musk has and is changing the world, change always makes people nervous.
TaylorAlexander 3y ago
Having met Musk is irrelevant when deciding whether to trust the public statements of someone who has a long and well documented history of lying in public statements. In particular he has repeatedly lied about business related details, most notably claims of self driving readiness. It doesn’t require strong opinions about Musk to understand the value in taking what he says with skepticism.
wg0 3y ago
OP has only expressed lack of confidence in the statements Elon makes. Objectively speaking, there are plenty of examples where it has been the case that let's say, there were "alternate facts" involved. And no, it is not about predictions of this being done by that year alone.
fredgrott 3y ago
honestly it is from Elon's own history.... 1. His only software contribution at PayPal was torn out and discarded 2. After his software at paypal was rejected he was fired by the board at paypal. It is not that he does not have business skills to market. It is that he presents himself as someone that does quality engineering..which in fact is somewhat false.
jacquesm 3y ago
Musk has gone to substantial lengths to undermine his own credibility and you wonder why people question his statements? It's not even a 'strong opinion' at this point, it's just reality: Musk can be trusted for what he says. It may be true, it may not be true. It may be technically true. But you'll never know until you've seen the evidence with your own eyes.
failbuffer 3y ago
Truth in tech matters to this audience, at least to the engineers. Musk had repeatedly overpromised and undelivered ("full self-driving"), made preposterous claims (2019: Tesla Semi convoy FSD is "something we can do today"), and engaged in fraudulent behavior (SolarCity or the "funding secured" tweet). You can love him because rockets, EVs, and enormous satellite constellations are pretty cool, but you'd be a fool to trust him.
lemper 3y ago
not him. but I just can't trust any words of him since many years ago without any hard proof. as for his impacts, I spent the last 20 minutes thinking what has he done that positively impact me and found nothing.
2OEH8eoCRo0 3y ago
> Starlink is good for the world. It wasn't good for Ukraine when Musk pulled the plug on them.
- adventured 3y ago
  Which is overshadowed drastically - 1,000 to 1 at least - by the good Starlink has done for Ukraine. That's about the weakest straw argument I've seen against Starlink. Musk's SpaceX is the only reason Ukraine has been able to maintain its Internet infrastructure throughout the war. It would have been a communications disaster otherwise, particularly for all non-military (NATO would have done its best to provide patch-work communications for the military).
  - 2OEH8eoCRo0 3y ago
    Maybe, but he also interfered in a rather large Ukrainian operation to Russia's benefit. https://www.nytimes.com/2023/09/08/world/europe/elon-musk-ukraine-starlink-drones.html https://www.nytimes.com/2023/09/08/world/europe/elon-musk-uk... > Elon Musk foiled an attack on Russia’s Black Sea fleet last year > Mykhailo Podolyak, a top adviser to President Volodymyr Zelensky, accused Mr. Musk of enabling Russian aggression. Because of Mr. Musk’s decision, “civilians, children are being killed,” he wrote on X on Thursday. “This is the price of a cocktail of ignorance and big ego.” > a SpaceX executive said that Starlink had taken steps to curtail Ukraine’s use of the technology to control drones, infuriating Ukrainian officials.
adventured 3y ago
[flagged]
- johnnyworker 3y ago
  > the extreme response from the political left to wit: > I don't trust a single thing he says at this point without evidence That's a very unemotional, and very rational thing to say about anyone, really. Why should you "trust" a random stranger like that? If you call that "extreme" and launch into a tirade of Musk being on "their" list that's really just something to do with you, and not an argument to blindly trust Musk, or anyone else for that matter.
alienicecream 3y ago
It doesn't bother you to see someone take advantage of people's naivety with false promises?
chung8123 3y ago
I don't think starlink's private ownership is good for the world. I don't know enough about space but I hope there is room up there for a publicly owned satellite internet system.
benzible 3y ago
Do you actually limit your opinions to people you've met, based on your personal interactions with them? Do you consider your personal impressions of someone to be a better way of evaluating their truthfulness than the public record of their past statements? Musk's record is quite clear at this point: https://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:https://elonmusk.today https://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:https:...
footlose_3815 3y ago
Conversely, I am fascinated by people who have such strong opinions about Musk in the other direction. Those who jump to defend him. Those who put all his lies, deception, xenophobia, and record of publicly humiliating himself. I'll never take anything he says at face value because anything that's ever come out of his mouth is posturing. I'm frankly tired of billionaire windbags like him. I have no idea how someone could be a fan of his.
slibhb 3y ago
People are just making a friend-enemy distinction. If they judge Elon positively (friend), they minimize his flaws; if they judge him negatively (enemy), they minimize his contributions.

jvanderbot 3y ago

I suspect government contacts. And not US government contracts necessarily.

rburhum 3y ago

[flagged]

organsnyder 3y ago
Starlink has also been used by Musk to dictate decisions in the Ukraine war. That's far more serious than "just" a "culture war" issue.
- inemesitaffia 3y ago
  [dead]
- coding123 3y ago
  If Starlink had not existed, there would have been no decision to make. Just because it is an option doesn't mean the country needs to use it, depend on it at all. If your success or failure in a war depends on one company doing something or not, you're definitely doing WAR wrong.
  - organsnyder 3y ago
    Yes, perhaps it was naïve for Ukraine to assume that Musk's offer of Starlink access would come with no strings attached. Though I can certainly understand if Ukraine assumed that even if Musk tried to do something, the US government wouldn't let that happen, so perhaps the blame is on the United States. That being said, Musk did interfere. Whether he should have been trusted not to isn't really the point—the fact that he is inclined to use his wealth to dictate international policy in this way is extremely troubling.
    - inemesitaffia 3y ago
      The interference was the supply of equipment. Something that if meant for military use should have come via the State Department or Pentagon.
deleted 3y ago
[deleted]

belter 3y ago

Cash flow break-even is measured over a specific accounting period, which could be monthly, quarterly, or ...over the last hour... Without specifying the time frame, the statement is not relevant.

toomuchtodo 3y ago

I own some SpaceX, am happy to take the chance without access to audited financials. Could go to zero, or maybe my kids will go to the moon.

suoduandao3 3y ago
How'd you get in on that? Sounds like it could be an interesting story.
- toomuchtodo 3y ago
  Private equity marketplace as an accredited investor. I am a degenerate gambler at heart.
  - suoduandao3 3y ago
    Cool. If I die childless I'm considering willing my assets to a company like SpaceX or Blue Origin - any suggestions on which or should I just split it among the leaders at the time?
    - toomuchtodo 3y ago
      No suggestions on who unfortunately. A potential methodology is establishing a living trust, funding it with all of your wealth, a pour-over will to clean up anything you missed, and assign the beneficiaries accordingly based on your post life wishes (you should be able to trivially get SpaceX, Blue Origin, etcs EIN/taxpayer ID, although you would want to speak with someone at those orgs so they know your plan and someone can admin whatever is sent their way). Same as you would with charitable bequests as part of your estate, directed towards charities and non profits. Not an attorney, not your attorney, speak with one for estate planning purposes. Hope this helps!

minimaxir 3y ago

Or it's Twitter/X's "not including the cost of servicing debt, the company already is cash flow positive." https://slate.com/technology/2023/10/x-linda-yaccarino-debt-cash-flow-positive.html https://slate.com/technology/2023/10/x-linda-yaccarino-debt-...

good8675309 3y ago

So you trust public corps? Like Microsoft, Google, Facebook, etc. Are you this outraged anytime Sundar is mentioned or Satya or Zuckerberg, or any number of these other mega corp CEOs are mentioned? Because they are deeply corrupt and actively work against the people in the name of profits and power. I don't understand how Musk has become some boogey man to the chronically online types, sure he is self interested and focused on profits and power but no more so than all of these other tech CEOs.

rayiner 3y ago

I’m not a huge Musk fan, but his shortcoming seems to be more having unreasonable projections about the future. I’m not aware of him lying about things in the present.

good8675309 3y ago
> "unreasonable projections about the future" I've heard a few of them, like concerns about AI which I don't think are unreasonable but I'm curious about what other projections he's had that are unreasonable?
- suoduandao3 3y ago
  The Cybertruck's supposed to be out by now. Also self-driving.
  - good8675309 3y ago
    Ah, okay, yeah in those cases it seems he is overly optimistic, disingenuous, or just really bad at estimating projects. In the case of the Cybertruck there were major engineering issues that came up along with manufacturing issues, apparently it turned into a nightmare, I'm surprised that it actually looks like it may ship in the next few years.
- callalex 3y ago
  https://motherfrunker.ca/fsd/ https://motherfrunker.ca/fsd/
teg4n_ 3y ago
“funding secured” was him lying about the present
- rayiner 3y ago
  https://www.cnn.com/2023/02/03/cars/musk-tesla-tweet-lawsuit-jury/index.html https://www.cnn.com/2023/02/03/cars/musk-tesla-tweet-lawsuit...

deleted 3y ago

[deleted]

RC_ITR 3y ago

The "trick" here is that he is likely speaking of operational cashflows (i.e. the 'correct' metric for low CAPEX companies). The rub, of course, is that most of the cost for something like Starlink is designing, building, and launching the satellites, which shows up in investing cashflows. Put differently, if the company was actually generating more cash than it consumes on all levels, start the IPO right now and SpaceX will be a $1tn+ company (instead of a $100bn+ company that people expect will one day generate cash and then be a $1tn+ company).

dunmalg 3y ago
SpaceX will never have an IPO because being publicly traded means ceding a certain degree of control. The founders' goal is to make life multiplanetary, and the typical goal of rando shareholders is to pump up the stock price. They don't want to have to deal with the latter. They may at some point spin off Starlink and IPO that, but not until it's fully deployed and not heavily dependent on frequent, super cheap, low bureaucratic friction launch services from SpaceX.
- RC_ITR 3y ago
  https://www.reuters.com/business/aerospace-defense/spacex-fundraising-talks-150-bln-valuation-bloomberg-news-2022-11-15/ https://www.reuters.com/business/aerospace-defense/spacex-fu... They already have shareholders? And as you point out, if the founder really wanted to, he could have self-funded most of SpaceX (instead of buying X for example). He's a public company CEO already - he has no qualms about taking SpaceX public.

bryanlarsen 3y ago

You don't receive it, but there a several large institutional investors who do, and who could sue for billions if he's lying. It's not something non-actionable like saying "FSD this year". More significantly, both NASA and the Space Force receive SpaceX financial statements because they require reassurance that all their vendors are viable ongoing concerns. IOW, if this is a lie, then he could lose his 2 biggest customers. And I wouldn't be surprised if lying to the Space Force is an actual crime.

JonChesterfield 3y ago
Huh. So Space Force, which I was really sure is a joke, appears to be an actual thing complete with employees and things with wings. At least Wikipedia thinks so. Strange world to live in.
- dragonwriter 3y ago
  Space Force was created by breaking out existing capacities from the Air Force into a new subordinate organization within the Department of the Air Force (similar to the way the US Army Air Forces were split off into a new service to create the Air Force, but with a relation to the parent like the Marines have to the Navy.) It was a reorg with elaborate branding impacts, not a from-scratch creation.

MagicMoonlight 3y ago

If it’s privately owned then he has less reason to lie